Categories
Ealing and Northfield

Time for a bit of honesty

One of the features of the rubbish fiasco has been the downright dishonestly of its portrayal by the council. Council taxpayers pay council officers to be objective. They have failed.

A prime example is this notice which is featured prominently on the council’s website right now:

They say “Some of our trucks …”. They mean 88.5% of all dry recycling.

A more honest communication with the public would say something along the lines of:

Due to failures on the part of our contractor which the council has not been able to rectify the council is unable to deliver a kerbside recycling service. We can however take all of your dry recycling to an alternative facility which will take mixed recyclables and separate them. Therefore you do not need to sort your re-cycling for the time being. Please leave dry re-cycling unsorted in either your green box and/or white sack and it will all be sent for sorting by our contractor. When the contractor is able to restart kerbside recycling we will make an announcement.

Categories
Ealing and Northfield

Rubbish fiasco: Competence issue

What did the council do with the five months notice that it had?

Mistakes happen. Not everything always goes as it should. Should we give the council the benefit of the doubt over the rubbish fiasco? I don’t think so.

The council could see this coming. It seems that the council had sight of Enterprise’s mobilisation plan in October 2011, at least 5 clear months before the main part of the contract started (see answer to question 21). The council knew about the use of temporary vehicles in November 2011, at least 4 clear months before (see question 11).

One can only speculate about what happened when the council got this information. Did the officers and executive merely accept the assurances of the contractor that everything would be alright on the day? Did they cross their fingers and hope? The council had 4/5 months notice that this contract was going to go wrong. What did they do?

Note: The council finally published the answwers to the Tory group’s questions this morning, here.

Categories
Ealing and Northfield

Questions: Missed collections up nine times in April

When people phone or e-mail with a missed rubbish or recycling collection the council’s customer services people make a record. At the extraordinary council meeting to discuss Labour’s rubbish fiasco I asked about how many missed collections there were in April of this year under the new cleaning contract compared to last April.

Question 15:

How many missed collections were reported to the council in the month of April? How many were reported in April 2011?

Answer 15:

April 2012
8094 missed collection reports for domestic refuse and recycling.
April 2011
900 missed collection reports for domestic refuse and recycling.

I thought that the 900 number last year was too high. This year it has risen by a factor of 9. Totally shocking. To have over 8,000 people get in touch with the council over such a basic service is truly shocking. The council has been playing down the extent of the council’s rubbish fiasco.

Categories
Ealing and Northfield

Questions: One third of streets dirty in April

The council’s street monitoring team keep an eye on the street cleaning undertaken by our cleaning contractor and keep them up to the mark. At the extraordinary council meeting to discuss Labour’s rubbish fiasco I asked about how they were doing in April of this year under the new cleaning contract compared to last April.

Question 17:

How many streets were graded A, B, C by the street monitoring team in the month of April? How did this compare with April 2011?

Answer 17:

The following are the number of transects monitored this April (2012) with last April (2011) in brackets.

• Grade A 2960 (12,750)
• Grade B 790 (444)
• Grade C 681 (313)
• Grade D 7 (0)

These figures are not very transparent. According to another answer to a question the number of monitoring officers employed by the council has gone down from 7 to 5 (Question 18) but the number of transects (bits of street) monitored has been reduced by 2/3rds. At first sight this looks like a productivity disaster although I am prepared to accept that the officers may have been helping to sort out the problems with the Enterprise contract.

What we can do is compare the proportions at each grade, see below.

Last year only 5% of all Ealing’s streets were less than A grade. This April it is exactly one third. The new contract promised same day cleaning after the bin men had raced around making an awful mess as they have traditionally always done, whoever runs the contract or is in power politically. Last year the street cleaners reliably came around the next day and cleared up after their colleagues. Now it has all got a bit random. Sometimes they come before the collections. Sometimes days after. As a result the place is looking scruffier – one third of the borough looks scruffy according to the council’s own monitoring officers.

The answers still don’t seem to be up on the council’s website. You can download them here.

Categories
Ealing and Northfield

Questions: How much of your time has the council wasted?

In an attempt to get to the bottom of what happened with Ealing’s rubbish and recycling contract last month the Tory group on Ealing council asked a slew of 34 written questions at last week’s extraordinary council meeting on 8th May to discuss Labour’s rubbish fiasco.

The answers are required to be provided within 7 working days so councillors got an e-mail timed at 11.09pm last night. As it happens the attached pdf file was corrupted so it took until 8.28am this morning to get hold of something readable. The answers are still not up on the council’s website – anyone would think that the council does not want you to read them. You can read them here.

11 different Tory councillors asked questions. The 5 LibDem councillors had no questions as did the 40 Labour councillors – maybe they think that everything is fine.

Not all the Tory questions hit the mark, it is a bit like a game of battleships, but many did. The most telling question I think was question 14:

Question 14:

Can you please confirm the weight of dry-recycling that Ideal processed in April on behalf of Ealing? Can you also confirm the average monthly dry-recycling handled by Ealing in the last financial year?

Answer 14:

1062 tonnes were processed via the Ideal MRF in April 2012 according to data provided by the MRF. Whilst dry recycling kerbside tonnages average at about 1200 tonnes a month, the Ideal figure does not include collection data from the first week of the new contract when materials were sorted at the kerbside or data from the 4 kerbside sort rounds that have supported the comingled service over recent weeks. The overall collected dry figure is projected to be in line with steady state.

To clarify, normally the council collects 1,200 Tonnes of dry-recycling every month which is all carefully sorted and put out by our residents. In April almost 90% of this was chucked in the back of a lorry and driven to Kent. The council have tried to maintain that kerbside re-cycling has been continuing throughout their fiasco. It has, but on a tiny scale. 90% of residents’ hard work sorting out their recycling has been discarded in April. The council has let down residents badly.

Categories
Ealing and Northfield

Sahota’s campaign ignores the rules again

The campaign to get Onkar Sahota elected as an Assembly Member has been previously criticised by Mark Wallace for misusing public resources (in this case Parliament). Wallace reprinted an e-mail regarding a Sahota fundraiser sent by Virendra Sharma MP’s researcher Julian Bell who used his work e-mail address. As Bell works part-time as Sharma’s researcher in Parliament it was an official parliament.uk e-mail address he used. This might be judged a relatively minor offence but it demonstrates a contempt for the niceties on the part Bell.

Yesterday I went to the Town Hall to check the nomination papers of the candidates that took part in the election for the Ealing & Hillingdon GLA seat. I found more misbehaviour by Labour.

Ealing councillor Yoel Gordon acted as the agent for Onkar Sahota’s campaign. Again we see the casual contempt for the rules. He has used his council e-mail address for his own party’s political business. He is simply not allowed to do this.

Sahota himself spent a lot of time earlier this year jamming himself into official photographs, again breaking rules about misusing public resources for campaigning. Labour politicians in Ealing think that public resources are theirs to use as they like.

Categories
Ealing and Northfield

Rubbish Ealing fiasco

Last night’s extraordinary council meeting ended up being not very illuminating. Labour apologised and agreed that the new waste contract in Ealing was a fiasco but would not go as far as to accept that it was a disaster. I will settle for fiasco.

The man in charge, who called himself “a solutions person”, is Cllr Bassam Mahfouz, the portfolio holder for Environment and Transport. He said: “I reiterate our unreserved apology”. A more direct form of words such as “I am sorry” might have made him sound a little more contrite but contrition isn’t his thing. Mahfouz does smirky and huffy rather better. When it emerged during the debate that Mahfouz had known in advance that the contractor did not have the required vehicles in place at the start of the contract his response to opposition incredulity and questions as to why this information was not passed on was “You didn’t ask”.

After Labour’s library foul up, where the leader had to step in and do the job of the portfolio holder, again it has been council leader Julian Bell who has had to take the lead with this “fiasco”. In his speech Bell claimed that “Today’s missed collections were very few” and that the service was “essentially back to normal”. Although he claimed to have checked the stats he failed to give any hard numbers. He made reference, as did most of the Labour speakers to £85 million of cuts. Labour’s get out of jail free card played again.

The other line that Labour tried was that the new waste contractor was really quite good and had done a good job for other authorities. Both Cllrs Mahfouz and Daniel Crawford tried this line. I would like to see them try this with residents. A few of the Labour councillors tried to suggest that the extra meeting was a waste of public money. Cllr Johnson, Labour’s finance lead, said that the cost of the meeting could have been spent on remedial action. I reckon that giving Labour and the administration a good roasting on this subject is the most effective remedial action an opposition can take. Incidentally a couple of Enterprise managers had to sit through the whole event so that probably justifies the cost of the exercise right there.

In spite of repeated questioning neither Cllrs Bell nor Mahfouz could give any clarity about how early they escalated the rubbish Ealing fiasco to the Chief Executive of Enterprise. They claimed to have had lots of meetings but the lack of names and dates was telling. We heard a lot of slightly quaint stories from Bell and Mahfouz about their cycling around the Borough on their bikes over Easter and having daily meetings exhorting the Enterprise line managers who screwed up in April to do better. The word ineffective comes to mind.

Labour was determined that no real facts would emerge and the Labour chief whip pretty much taunted us that no facts would emerge. The Tory spokesman on environment, Cllr Tony Young, had been chasing for recycling and waste stats for a week since month end and been refused. I myself asked about the amount of dry-recycling diverted to the famous MRF in Kent and was also refused. An officer told me:

The figures will require validation by the Council in terms of audit trail and cross referencing with Enterprise weighbridge out records.

This is nonsense of course. We overheard when we visited the site a week earlier that for three out of four weeks in April 500 Tonnes Ealing dry-recycling has been processed by the site. In a normal month Ealing collects 1,200 Tonnes so around 55%, over half, of the hard work put in by residents to separate their waste has been wasted in April with no end in sight – only today I saw my carefully separated re-cycling chucked in the back of a garbage truck. Six weeks of wasted effort.

Labour tried to deny these figures but they all come from officers. Labour are trying to hide the embarrassing truth. When the numbers do finally emerge the administration will have to explain their glib assertions. “Back to normal”. No. I fear that we have achieved a rather worse new normal.

Categories
Ealing and Northfield

This Rubbish Council

This Conservative group press release was published today:

At a special Full Council Meeting (May 8), called by the Conservatives, they demanded the return of a first class waste and collection service for the people of the Borough and called no confidence in the Labour Council’s ability to deliver it

Councillor David Millican, Conservative Group Leader said:

Labour apologised but took no responsibility for the inexcusable service

Categories
Ealing and Northfield Mayor Johnson

Boris wins but Barnes loses

Commiserations to ex-GLA member for Ealing and Hillingdon, Richard Barnes who lost his seat this afternoon to Labour’s Onkar Sahota. There were 3,110 votes in it or 1.9%.

Mayor Boris Johnson had a much better time of it in Ealing & Hillingdon beating Ken Livingstone by 12,215 votes or 7.5%.

Boris outperformed his party by 12.1% and even Richard outperformed by 3.4%.

Ealing & Hillingdon results here and here.

Categories
Ealing and Northfield

Unison baulks at council’s £1.5 million terms and conditions saving

It is interesting to see the Unison union pushing back hard on the council’s ever so modest proposals to shave £1.5 million off staff costs by renegotiating staff terms and conditions, see Ealing & Acton Gazette.

Ealing’s terms and conditions really are very generous. Staff do 35 hour weeks. New starters get 27 days holiday which goes up to 30 days after 5 years and 33 days after ten. The chief officers get 33 days on day one. In the 2009/10 financial year non-school staff alone earned £1.8 million in overtime, anti-social hours and special responsibility allowances. The difference between these Ts and Cs and the kind of Ts and Cs enjoyed by the bulk of the workers paying council tax in Ealing is worth about 10% of the £130 million pay bill, not the 1% the council is going for.

It is true to say that local government workers are in the 3rd year of a pay freeze. This is a real hardship but many in the private sector have endured pay cuts or extended periods of stagnant wages since 2008 and are still working significantly longer hours than Ealing council’s staff.

In spite of the pay freeze and “400 posts” Mary Lancaster of Unison refers to the council pay bill has been creeping up due to upwards regrading of groups of staff during re-organisations. More on this another day.

It is worth noting that school leaders on the Ealing Schools Forum feel so comfortable with their finances that they opted out of this negotiation for their support staff (teachers are on separate national Ts and Cs) so they will continue to enjoy the terms and conditions described above.

Rather strangely the leader of the council, Julian Bell, has taken personal charge of these negotiations himself. This is a terrible decision. He takes on too much himself as his cabinet is so weak. He really could have left the initial negotiations to his senior officers. If he doesn’t achieve this very modest saving he will be in big trouble. Asking staff to give up £1.5 million of the £85 million savings the council is seeking isn’t exactly ambitious.